America maintained its exceptionalism for 200 years because it attracted a special kind of immigrant; people similar in spirit to the first colonists – individuals drawn to the promise of Franklin’s entrepreneurial individualism. They didn’t come just for employment and with the intention of sending a third of their earnings back home and then returning there some day. They came wanting to be not laborers, but Americans.

HOWEVER, as an immigrant myself, I have to make one important correction to an important point made by the former congressman from Colorado, Tom Tancredo.

Not everyone in the great immigration waves in our past have come here with any entrepreneurial spirit. Not everyone came here wanting to be Americans. There have ALWAYS been large numbers of immigrants coming to our shores just wanting to get a job, any job, to send money back home, and to return someday with a nice nest egg. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of eastern and southern Europeans were brought here in cattle boats a hundred or more years ago to labor in our mines and steel mills. Entire counties there were emptied of their day laborer and tenant farmer populations to work at jobs here that no American (even then) wanted to do for any amount of money. Then most got simply stuck here because they never made enough either to help the folks at home or to return home.

The critical difference between the immigration waves then and now that no one dares to mention, certainly not in public or in the media is that NONE of the immigrants of old came to take over this country, and most certainly not in the name of the old country.

All of them appreciated the essential and unique character of this country as the one place on earth with freedom and opportunity. All of them made the effort to learn our language and culture, even if many were stuck in ethic ghettos. This includes even those socialists and communists who fled from tsarist Russia and elsewhere, and gave rise to the core of “progressives” and “liberals” that Glenn Beck likes to call the red diaper doper babies from NYU, Columbia and other elite universities.

This is in stark contrast to the Mexicans who’ve been flooding in here with ideations of reconquista, and even if many might not want to reattach the West (and more) to Mexico, they all have no problem demanding that WE assimilate to THEIR language and culture, and that we leave our borders completely open to unlimited immigration (while they keep their country closed).

This is in stark contrast to the Arabs and other muslims who come here with ideations of a jihad — the establishment of a global caliphate, the imposition of sharia law, the destruction of western and especially American civilization (yes, there IS such a thing…) by any means necessary, such as the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center, the shooting in Fort Hood, the bombings of the Boston Marathon, etc. etc. etc., throughout the past several decades.

And all we do in response to these two glaring exceptions is, once again, to debate immigration “reforms” — amnesty and “path to citizenship” — on the same terms as in 1986. We are demonstrating that we are NOT capable of learning from history, and therefore we are hell bent on repeating it, even if it means national suicide via the extinction of our national character. You DO have to ask, are the proponents of the latest immigration bill incredibly stupid, and are they expecting us to be just as stupid, or are they acting knowingly, deliberately, in pursuit of a goal they do not dare to articulate in words we might understand all too clearly?

In the face of a hostile invasion the most obvious, logical, common sense response from a rational government would be to:

1. Close the borders and the points of entry.

2. Repatriate everyone who is here illegally.

3. Limit employment to citizens and legal immigrants.

4. Limit welfare benefits to citizens.

5. End “path to citizenship,” immigration, tourism, work and student visas from hostile countries.

6. Track visitors while they are here and make sure they leave when they are required to.

The Constitution assigns to the federal government the responsibility of national defense. Even though the government did use to do its job in the past, and immigrants entered on our terms with our permission, today our politicians are too busy pushing “immigrants’ rights,” unlimited immigration to America as a “human right.” We can’t even ask foreigners, how did you get here, why the hell are your here? No; we put jihadists on welfare. What a great country….

Advertisements

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

2 thoughts on “47. The Vanishing American (with a correction)”

There is another big difference between “then and now” immigration: Political Correctness. Previous waves of immigrants were, by and large, able to accept and even embrace American culture. Most wanted to blend in and become Americans…not Italian-Americans, or Irish-Americans, or Greek-Americans, etc.

Today we have PC that doesn’t tolerate the truth. For instance, the Muslim faith is not compatible with American culture. Their holy doctrines preclude a Muslim from becoming an “infidel” under penalty of death. AND infidels must convert to Islam or be murdered. That is not from some radical Muslim’s writings, that’s from the Holy Qur’an that is carried, read and followed by EVERY Muslim. It is a capital crime under Shariah Law to become an American, “a follower of Satan.”

So why are we letting ANY Muslims immigrate, since they are our sworn enemy in the world-wide Jihad? Because PC has replaced the First Amendment; because worshiping “diversity” is the new PC religion; because people blinded by PC can’t see the “divide and conquer” strategy going on all around them at all levels of government and our education system; because Americans have become lazy on government hand-outs, ignorant of their own interests, apathetic to the danger of a government that controls every aspect of living, and liberal ideology served up by the media and the entertainment industry together.

This is part of a greater story. Islam is not a religion and does not, should not enjoy First Amendment protection. It is a totalitarian subversive ideology which loses its First Amendment protection as soon as it is put into practice, as in NYC, Fort Hood, Boston, etc. PC blinds our leaders to the only correct course of action.